Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Ruby vs Zsh (Z shell): What are the differences?
Syntax: Ruby is a programming language, while Zsh (Z shell) is a Unix shell. Ruby is used for creating applications and scripts, while Zsh is used for interacting with the operating system. The syntax of Ruby involves writing code in a structured manner with specific rules and conventions, while Zsh syntax is focused on executing commands and managing files in a terminal environment.
Usage: Ruby is primarily used for web development, automation, and system administration tasks, while Zsh is mainly utilized as a command-line interface for Unix-like operating systems. Ruby is designed for building software applications and websites, whereas Zsh is tailored for interacting with the system, managing files, and executing commands efficiently through a shell environment.
Error Handling: In Ruby, error handling is done using try-catch blocks and specific error classes like exceptions, ensuring a more robust and structured approach to handling exceptions. On the other hand, Zsh utilizes built-in error handling mechanisms, such as trap and trap ERR, to manage errors and exceptions efficiently in a shell scripting environment.
Community Support: Ruby has a large and active community that contributes to libraries, frameworks, and resources, making it easier for developers to find solutions and support for their projects. Zsh, while also having a dedicated user base, may have a more niche community compared to Ruby, leading to potentially fewer resources and community-driven support for users.
Extension Capabilities: Ruby allows for the easy integration of external libraries and gems to extend its functionality and add additional features to applications. Zsh supports plugins and custom scripts to enhance its capabilities, allowing users to personalize and optimize their shell environment according to their preferences and requirements.
Job Scheduling: Ruby provides tools like Delayed Job or Sidekiq for job scheduling and processing tasks asynchronously, enabling developers to manage background jobs efficiently. In contrast, Zsh relies on utilities like cron or at for scheduling tasks and executing commands at specific times or intervals within a Unix-like operating system.
In Summary, Ruby and Zsh differ in terms of syntax, usage, error handling, community support, extension capabilities, and job scheduling capabilities, catering to distinct needs in programming and system administration tasks.
In 2015 as Xelex Digital was paving a new technology path, moving from ASP.NET web services and web applications, we knew that we wanted to move to a more modular decoupled base of applications centered around REST APIs.
To that end we spent several months studying API design patterns and decided to use our own adaptation of CRUD, specifically a SCRUD pattern that elevates query params to a more central role via the Search action.
Once we nailed down the API design pattern it was time to decide what language(s) our new APIs would be built upon. Our team has always been driven by the right tool for the job rather than what we know best. That said, in balancing practicality we chose to focus on 3 options that our team had deep experience with and knew the pros and cons of.
For us it came down to C#, JavaScript, and Ruby. At the time we owned our infrastructure, racks in cages, that were all loaded with Windows. We were also at a point that we were using that infrastructure to it's fullest and could not afford additional servers running Linux. That's a long way of saying we decided against Ruby as it doesn't play nice on Windows.
That left us with two options. We went a very unconventional route for deciding between the two. We built MVP APIs on both. The interfaces were identical and interchangeable. What we found was easily quantifiable differences.
We were able to iterate on our Node based APIs much more rapidly than we were our C# APIs. For us this was owed to the community coupled with the extremely dynamic nature of JS. There were tradeoffs we considered, latency was (acceptably) higher on requests to our Node APIs. No strong types to protect us from ourselves, but we've rarely found that to be an issue.
As such we decided to commit resources to our Node APIs and push it out as the core brain of our new system. We haven't looked back since. It has consistently met our needs, scaling with us, getting better with time as continually pour into and expand our capabilities.
In December we successfully flipped around half a billion monthly API requests from our Ruby on Rails application to some new Python 3 applications. Our Head of Engineering has written a great article as to why we decided to transition from Ruby on Rails to Python 3! Read more about it in the link below.
When I was evaluating languages to write this app in, I considered either Python or JavaScript at the time. I find Ruby very pleasant to read and write, and the Ruby community has built out a wide variety of test tools and approaches, helping e deliver better software faster. Along with Rails, and the Ruby-first Heroku support, this was an easy decision.
Pros of Ruby
- Programme friendly608
- Quick to develop538
- Great community492
- Productivity469
- Simplicity432
- Open source274
- Meta-programming235
- Powerful208
- Blocks157
- Powerful one-liners140
- Flexible70
- Easy to learn59
- Easy to start52
- Maintainability42
- Lambdas38
- Procs31
- Fun to write21
- Diverse web frameworks19
- Reads like English14
- Makes me smarter and happier10
- Rails9
- Elegant syntax9
- Very Dynamic8
- Matz7
- Programmer happiness6
- Object Oriented5
- Elegant code4
- Friendly4
- Generally fun but makes you wanna cry sometimes4
- Fun and useful4
- There are so many ways to make it do what you want3
- Easy packaging and modules3
- Primitive types can be tampered with2
Cons of Ruby
- Memory hog7
- Really slow if you're not really careful7
- Nested Blocks can make code unreadable3
- Encouraging imperative programming2
- No type safety, so it requires copious testing1
- Ambiguous Syntax, such as function parentheses1